ArticleBMC biology2024
The roles of cell wall polysaccharides in response to waterlogging stress in Brassica napus L. root.
Article in BMC biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanism analysis of uniconazole pretreatment improving waterlogging tolerance of different genotypes of Brassica napus L.BMC plant biology · 2026Article
- Haplotype-resolved genome assembly provides insights into the evolutionary origin of waterlogging-tolerantHorticulture research · 2026Article
- Integrating multiomic resources and gene expression studies to identify candidates for engineering climate-resilientFrontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Biochemical Defense Mechanisms of Olive Varieties AgainstPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Transcriptome and Small-RNA Sequencing Reveals the Response Mechanism ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Advanced imaging-enabled understanding of cell wall remodeling mechanisms mediating plant drought stress tolerance.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Review
- The roles of cell wall polysaccharides in response to waterlogging stress in Brassica napus L. root.BMC biology · 2024Article
- Multi-Omics Unveils the Dual-Life of the Aquatic Plant Potamogeton nodosus.Physiologia plantarumArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBrassica napus L. (B. napus) is susceptible to waterlogging stress during different cultivation periods. Therefore, it is crucial to enhance the resistance to waterlogging stress to achieve a high and stable yield of B. napus.
resultsHere we observed significant differences in the responses of two B. napus varieties in root under waterlogging stress. The sensitive variety (23651) exhibited a more pronounced and rapid reduction in cell wall thickness and root integrity compared with the tolerant variety (Santana) under waterlogging stress. By module clustering analysis based on transcriptome data, we identified that cell wall polysaccharide metabolism responded to waterlogging stress in root. It was found that pectin content was significantly reduced in the sensitive variety compared with the tolerant variety. Furthermore, transcriptome analysis revealed that the expression of two homologous genes encoding polygalacturonase-inhibiting protein 2 (PGIP2), involved in polysaccharide metabolic pathways, was highly upregulated in root of the tolerant variety under waterlogging stress. BnaPGIP2s probably confer waterlogging resistance by inhibiting the activity of polygalacturonases (PGs), which in turn reduces the degradation of the pectin backbone polygalacturonic acid.
conclusionsOur findings demonstrate that cell wall polysaccharides in root plays a vital role in response to the waterlogging stress and provide a theoretical foundation for breeding waterlogging resistance in B. napus varieties.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.